Idiographic and nomothetic approaches

Cards (16)

  • The idiographic approach suggest that psychology should be the study of individuals because, by obtaining lots of detailed information about that individual (or group), we can understand human behaviour better.
  • The nomothetic approach suggests that psychology should be the study of large and varied groups to make generalisations about what is typical in different aspects of human behaviour.
  • This debate has implications for the type of research method psychologists use - whether we study individuals in depth, or study larger groups and discuss averages.
  • The number of participants in idiographic research is small, often a single case, Some research might include information from family, friends or others, but the focus is on detail. This does not mean that generalisations are not made - but the initial focus is on understanding the individual.
  • Most idiographic research is qualitative. For instance, research on depression would be based on first-hand accounts from a small number of people. Participants would be interviewed in depth and the focus may be on a particular facet of human behaviour, such as how the participants coped with their experience (using a fairly unstructured interview).
  • This qualitative data from idiographic research is then analysed and emergent themes are identified. Conclusions may help mental health professionals determine best practice.
  • The idiographic approach is most associated with the humanistic and psychological approaches. For example, Carl Roger’s sought to explain the process of self-development including the role of unconditional positive regard. This was derived from in-depth conversations with clients in therapy. Freud’s careful observations of individuals were the basis of his explanation of human nature, for example the case of Little Hans was used to explain how a phobia might develop.
  • The main aim of the nomothetic approach is generalisation in order to create ‘laws’ i.e. create general principles of behaviour which then, for example, could be applied in individual situations such as drug therapy.
  • Nomothetic research most closely fits the traditional models of the ‘scientific method’ in psychology. Hypotheses are formulated, samples of people are assessed in some way and the numerical data produced is analysed for its statistical significance. Nomothetic approaches seek to quantify (count) human behaviour.
  • The behaviourist and biological approaches are nomothetic even though they sometimes use quite small samples. For example Skinner studied animals to develop the general laws of learning. His research looked at one aspect of behaviour in a few animals but the main aim was to establish general laws. Similarly biological psychology mainly use a small sample, such as Sperry’s split-brain research which involved repeated testing and was, in part, the basis for understanding hemispheric lateralisation.
  • A key difference between idiographic and nomothetic approaches is how each related to subjectivity and objectivity. The idea of objectivity lies at the heart of the nomothetic approach. Laws of behaviour are only possible if methods of assessment are delivered in a standardised and objective way. This ensures true replication occurs across samples of behaviour and removes the contaminating influence of bias.
  • In contrast, researchers working within the idiographic approach tend not to believe that objectivity in psychological research is possible. It is people’s individual experience of their unique context that is important, rather than some underlying reality ‘out there’ that is waiting to be discovered.
  • One strength of the idiographic approach is that is contributes to the nomothetic approach. The idiographic approach uses in-depth qualitative methods of investigation and this provides a global description of one individual. This may complement the nomothetic approach by shedding further light on general laws or by challenging such laws. For example, a single case may generated hypotheses for further study. This suggests that even though the focus is on fewer individuals, the idiographic approach may still help form ‘scientific’ laws of behaviour.
  • That said, supporters of the idiographic approach should still acknowledge the narrow and restricted nature of their work. Meaningful generalisations cannot be made without further examples, as this means there is no adequate baseline with which to compare behaviour. Also, methods associated with the idiographic approach tend to be the least scientific in that conclusions often rely on the subjective interpretation of the researcher and so are open to bias. This suggests that it is difficult to build effective general theories of human behaviour in the complete absence of monotheistic research
  • A strength of both approaches is that they fit with the aims of science. The processes involved in nomothetic research are similar to those used in the natural sciences, for example establishing objectivity through standardisation, control and statistical testing. However researchers using the idiographic approach also seek to objectify their methods. For example, through triangulation is used whereby findings from a range of studies using different qualitative methods are compared as a way of increasing their validity. This suggests both approaches raise psychology’s status as a science.
  • A limitation of the nomothetic approach is loss of understanding of the individual. The fact that the nomothetic approach is preoccupied with general laws, prediction and control means it has been accused of ’losing the whole person’. For example knowing that there is a 1% lifetime risk of developing schizophrenia tells us little about what life is like for someone wit the disorder. Understanding the subjective experience of schizophrenia might prove useful when it comes to devising appropriate treatment options, for example. The nomothetic approach may sometimes fail to relate to ‘experience’